Jump to content
SAU Community

FFS! i crashed my r33 5 days after getting it!


Recommended Posts

Your best bet if your not insured, or insured thrid party, is to carry around cards you've mocked up for a well known law firm, cept obviously with your name and contact details .... it's amazing how much easier people will co-operate without going through insurance if they think you have connections.

;)

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well I suggest getting at least 2 quotes to get the car fixed, with the original bar, (just a quote) then send a copy of both quotes along with a letter to both the insurance agency and the woman. Stating that if no reply is sent within two weeks you will be taking legal action. If they don't, then get a solicitor and take it to court. There was no police on the scene so there is no evidence. They can't check skid marks after the fact. I hope you've got contact's for the witnesses who said it was her fault.

If it goes to court you will win, the only true fact in the case is that she pulled out in front of you. All you have to say is It didn't feel like I was speeding and what ever you do, don't once admit you broke the speed limit. You don't have to say you weren't speeding, just don't say anything. Then sue for legal and repair costs. Then take the money and speed the extra on what ever bar you want.

Sorry to here about the car dude.

I see this sort of stuff everday at work so hope this explains it alittle better and gives you some options if she dont pay up!

1. The other driver was crossing the path of the vehicle with the right of way. Other driver is at fault.This is proved from the points of impact. .ie your front end into her right side.

2. There was no SCIENTIFIC reading of your speed, even the skid marks will have gone by now.Thus making it hard for the other driver or witnessess to prove you were speeding.

3. Because neither car had to be towed it isnt necessarily a police matter, however, if there is greater than i think its between $500 and $1000 damage it can be reported leading to the other driver being fined for a number of things from Failing to give way (2 points) to Negligant driving (3 points) plus the fines. You may be able to persuade the other driver with this information.

4. I know how much it is a pain in the arse that it happened, however, always try to be courteous in your dealings with the other driver and other parties such as insurance copmanies etc. Getting agro wont get you anywhere in a hurry with these kind of ppl. Trust me!

5. Obtain 3 quotes for your damage and present them to the other driver. Giving her the option to pay privately as to avoid insurance premium consequences may invoke her to pay up!

6. Goodluck!!!!!!!!

7. Maybe if your not insured fully yet, do a cheap defensive driver training course. I got intensive driver traing because of my work and to be honest I cant count on both hands and feet the number of times it has saved my precious baby, and perhaps even me from injury!!

Guest | hype^ |

thanx for the info guys..

GOOD NEWS!!!

the lady paid her excess and the insurance company told me to get 2 quotes.. and they'll send a inspector on tuesday to look at the car and tell me what quote to go with...

:P:O :O :lol: :lol:

so by the sounds of things this aint gonna cost me a cent!! :D

so (fingers crossed) i should be commin out cruizing again in the next few weeks..

:uh-huh: :uh-huh:

Hype,

We are running a drive/ cams licence day at Oran Park Next month.

http://forums.skylinesaustralia.com/showth...s=&threadid=585

Its a 2 day course. The first day is a basic drive course like XEQTOR said he did. The second is high speed cornering/braking, track course to help get you round the race track quicker. You get your CAM's licence at the end of the 2 day's which means you can drive at any raceway in OZ. If we get a couple more people the price drops to $570 for the two days.

It migh be a bit much $ but a single basic day is $200 -$300. the two day course is Good value if you ever think you might come to the creek or Oran park one day!

Hype, I've been in many insurance situations and I think this is what is going to happen. Regardless of what you think, her insurance company will say that your in the wrong and will not pay you. This is because from their point of view, she was in front and you should have seen her and been in control.

It doesn't matter how fast or slow your going, if your front hits them your automatically in the wrong.

If it happens again you should get a witness straight away to write out what they saw plus all the usual details.

Just giving you the low down mate!!

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...